I find it painful to watch Bill Maher let alone watch him try to compare Palin’s qualifications to Obama’s…they are equally unqualified.

The one thing that Palin has on Obama, besides having a likable spouse, is that despite her occasional flubs and newly created vocabulary, she is a much better speaker than the big O. His, uhh, speech, is, uhh, haltingly, uhh, annoying, and, that’s, uhh, all, and, you, know, that, I need, to, say, about, that!

You honestly consider SARAH PALIN a better speaker than Obama? God help this country. And for your information, Michele Obama’s popularity is extraordinarily high from the polls I’ve seen. Don’t know why you don’t like her. Most of the rest of America seems to.

I don’t think that either are exceptional speakers but I do appreciate and respond to her much more candid and honest responses than that of Mr. Teleprompter.

As far as Michelle, I’m going off my gut reaction to her facial expressions, what she says, and how she says it. I’ve never met the woman but she strikes me as a bitch. Please don’t assume that I equate strong woman with a bitch either. I’m not aware of any one reason why I do not like her, I just don’t.

I agree that her popularity is probably even higher than that of her husbands but I am not one to go along with the crowd just because. By the way, the “likes” of America people is pretty fickle and I do not envy the public eye any person in these positions have to endure, including Sarah Palin or her children.

This inability to distinguish the qualities of an Obama from a Palin is astonishing and, given what is at stake, terribly demoralizing. While I would love to leave this alone, Palin has put herself forward for public office, and therefore cannot be ignored.

To begin, what Obama has achieved is evidence of exceptional ability, industry, and character. He earned his way into and through top schools, and by age thirty, was teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Do you have any idea what that means, Lisad? Of course you don’t. It was actually rhetorical.

Sarah Palin, by contrast, is a self-promoting imbecile, whose ambition so far outstrips her intellect, breadth of knowledge, and industriousness as to defy description. She is a calamity, an utter disgrace. That McCain chose this creature as running-mate forever tarnished an otherwise admirable career of public service.

We do not allow persons prone to frequent violent epileptic seizures to drive school buses filled with children. Are we being unfair, or nasty? Of course not. If such a person presented him- or herself as a candidate for bus-driver, and insisted vehemently on gaining the position, we would have to be firm, wouldn’t we? This is how we must treat Ms. Palin. We must insist that she return to whatever northern metropolis it was that produced her, where she be allowed to run birthday parties for third-graders, but no more. If she continues on her present course, people of sense must recognize the terrible threat she poses to the world, and attack her with all the viciousness they can muster.

With respect to the likable-spouse foolishness, of course you don’t like Michele Obama. You didn’t like Hillary Clinton either, I’m sure. They’re both intelligent, assertive women. Many people–but women particularly–with room-temperature IQ dislike such women. They make them feel inadequate. That’s why Sarah gets such cheers; she makes the dull feel shiny. Of course, intelligent women loathe Palin like poison. Here’s to them, and the venom I hope they drench her in.

Guardo, thank you for the thoughtful response, to my earlier post regarding my criteria for NOT choosing a presidential candidate. I’m unsure of which part you didn’t understand in my post and what it pertained to but I’m trying to gain a little more insight into your position, since you seem so sincerely condescending and pseudo-intellectual in your remarks.

To begin with, I stated, “…try to compare Palin’s qualifications to Obama’s…they are equally unqualified.” This is my opinion based on the fact that one person is a former mayor of a small town while the other is a former senator. Neither one came with a lot of experience in anything beyond these positions.

“Do you have any idea what that means, guardo? Of course you don’t. It was actually rhetorical.” I merely placed your comment here to showcase how snide you are in your responses. Rather rude of you but I am beginning to gain more insight into who you are.

Your degradation of Sarah Palin’s reputation is reprehensible. I am not here to defend her but your comments are slanderous. Especially when you examine who Obama chose as a running mate. When I picture Joe, I immediately see Obama shaking his head in disgust while the rest of us just chuckle and ask WTF?

I believe that towards the end of your “venemous” rant you give Palin more credit than perhaps she deserves, when you state, “…recognize the terrible threat she poses to the world…” Really? That sounds like a powerful person. I don’t think that sounds like her but you are entitled to your opinion.

The rest of your reply indirectly attacks me by implying that I have a room-temperature IQ. Nice. I’m assuming that you are a male since you are not guarda so, I will inform you that intelligent and assertive women would not attack other women in that manner but you’re not a woman, are you?

Hillary Clinton has done an outstanding job as secretary of state. So much so, that she is outshining her commander in chief.

Lastly, I would like to address the hatred, fear, and loathing that you’ve expressed for Sarah Palin. It sounds like a personal problem and I would highly recommend finding a professional that you could discuss these issues with in order to find some balance in your emotional well-being because right now you sound ill; “Here’s to them, and the venom I hope they drench her in.” It’s sad and I wish you all the best.

I’m practically breathless at your beautifully written, intelligent, well-thought-out reply. Thank you! You said it SO much better than I did. I agree with you 100%. Comparing Obama’s speaking style and content to Sarah Palin and saying Palin and Obama are on par with each other indicates a serious lack of discernment, imo.

By the way, I would have voted for Hillary Clinton had she gotten the nomination. It took me a while to warm up to Obama, but as I really listened to him, and began to like more and more what he had to say and how he said it. What disappointed me deeply was that so many women whom I know and like said they wouldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because they “didn’t like her”. Huh? I kept asking why, but no one could (or would) pinpoint it. It boggled my mind, and in retrospect I feel this is a big reason she didn’t get the nomination, because for many people Hillary Clinton isn’t “likeable”. However, this has been the trend in politics — you seem to have to have a likeability factor in order to be elected. Look at GW. He wasn’t elected for his abilities or his intellect, for sure.

As to Palin, as long as you pretend she isn’t lying most of the time, or at best spouting half-truths she just made up on the fly, she comes across as likeable, in a decent next-door-neighbor kind of way. But the glaring inaccuracies and lies make me unable to trust her. As to “Mr. Teleprompter”, I’ve seen Obama speak extenporaneously with tons of facts at his fingertips, and he never misspeaks, other than to say “Uh” too frequently. Usually he says this when he’s thinking — when he gets going I find him to be an impressive and inspiring orator.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, has never impressed me with the content of any of her speeches. Perhaps she reaches some with her rhetoric, which appeals on a basic, emotional level. I’m unsure why ‘lisad’ considers Palin honest. It’s clear she tried to cover up a lot of underhanded stuff she was involved in in Alaska, and I believe that’s why, in part, she left the office of Governor early. As to being “candid”, I have found Palin to be woefully underprepared, and if that’s “candid”, perhaps she should work a little harder at having a few actual facts under her belt before she speaks.

I was very interested in Palin when she first came on the national political scene and paid quite a bit of attention to her candidacy, as I’d never heard of her and was intrigued that we might actually have two viable female candidates in the Presidential election. I was open to her and listened to everything I could, but very quickly came to the conclusion, after watching and hearing her, that she was not qualified, she was not prepared, she should not have been considered as a Vice Presidential candidate based on her abilities or intellect, and that America would be in deep doo-doo if McCain were elected, suffered from ill health, and Palin had to take over. DEEEEEEEP DOO DOO. It was a terrifying prospect to me that she ever be elected to national, public office.

A short aside on Michele Obama — I didn’t particularly like her in the beginning, and found her to be very guarded. However, I didn’t consider whether I liked her to have any bearing on my vote for Obama. And she has thus far comported herself very well as First Lady. I think she’s found her role and has carried it out very well.

Obama’s formal title was “senior lecturer,” but the University of Chicago Law School says he “served as a professor” and was “regarded as” a professor. Below is a statement released by the University of Chicago Law School:

UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as “Senior Lecturer.” From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

To lisad (the structure of the forum does not provide a “reply” option)

So lisa, you’d like to play? I normally avoid battles of wits with unarmed opponents, but this will simply be too much fun.

You say, “As far as Obama teaching law at the University of Chicago by age 30, he was actually a “lecturer”. There is a difference.”

A difference between what? Being a lecturer and teaching! You idiot. Or do you mean between being a tenured professor and a lecturer. Yes, there is a difference. But they both teach. That’s not the difference. And they are both referred to as “professor,” as even your fact-checker screed in the biased Post clarifies. But a lecturer, and then a senior lecturer, in law at the University of Chicago is an enormously rarefied position to earn. And that was clearly my point. You don’t find that impressive? Try this: In late 1988, Obama entered Harvard Law School. He was selected as an editor of the Harvard Law Review at the end of his first year, and president of the journal in his second year. We are talking here about an exceptionally talented, insightful, and industrious person. That “uh” you refer to when he is answering interesting questions reflects a mind that is considering subtleties of an idea or issue that are simply inaccessible to you.

And you looked up “guardo” in an Italian dictionary. Very good. Yes, I watch. And I am male. A male professor. Sorry about that. But enough about me. Let’s talk about you. The evidence so far . . .

“By the way, the “likes” of America people is pretty fickle and I do not envy the public eye any person in these positions have to endure, including Sarah Palin or her children.”

What on earth is this!? The grammar and syntax are worse than Sarah’s!

And how about this . . .

“As far as Michelle, I’m going off my gut reaction to her facial expressions, what she says, and how she says it. I’ve never met the woman but she strikes me as a bitch.”

The person to whom you refer is the First Lady of the United States.

So what do we know about you? That you are an insolent clown. That your thinking is so blunted, so clouded that you cannot piece together words so as to construct a coherent English sentence.

Finally, I would take issue with your view that I overestimate the threat Palin poses. She is terribly ambitious, and this country has many people in it who see the world through the same fog as you do. I think her threat to the world is very real.

Guardo, you’re absolutely correct. I am a complete idjit but I also am constantly seeking answers to my questions and misunderstandings. My hope is that me talk pretty oneday. Yes, I’m a fan of Sedaris.

I agree that the Huffington Post is a complete waste of space when it comes to unbiased fare but I was trying to be accomodating to the bias shown here in this post when searching for a quick fact check. I appreciate the much more informative one provided by Julee.

In regards to the differences between lecturer and professor, I suppose it comes down to symantics. Yes, there is a difference, albiet slight. As far as President Obama’s moments of greatness when speaking are far and few between. There is a stark difference between a man who speaks from his heart and one who speaks from the page. Obama rarely speaks from his heart…

As far as my ability to discern the male form of gurado from the female form actaully comes from my rudimentary working knowledge of Spanish but I am flattered to know that you think I had to look it up. Cool beans!

It’s also helpful to know that you are able to breakdown the syntax and grammar of a poorly written paragraph. It was horrendous and I’m sure that my high school “lecturer” is rolling over in his grave knowing that I created that mess.

While I’m certainly not a professor, I do believe that I am an excellent judge of character. Over and over I am proven correct about my ‘first impressions’. As far as my audacity in stating that Michell Obama “strikes me as a bitch” is a statement that I’m willing to stand by, regardless of her title.

What do you know about me? Really very little. So, I guess I’ll take my blunted and clouded thinking brain and go gaze upon a sunflower while contemplating Fibonacci numbers and read about Bruneschelli’s dome. By the way the dome is gorgeous, amazing, and at the top of my list of ‘must see’ travel destinations. Or maybe I’ll just go watch one of the most incredible films ever made and that moves me to tears everytime I see it. I recommend it highly; the 1928 silent film, The Passion of Joan of Arc starring Maria Falconetti. I don’t know but I think she might be Italian…

Another clunker by Simon. He asks, “do we really need a new phrase to help us be more snide, snarky and insincere?,” and then gives us lines of Moses, Youngman, FDR, Churchill, and Shakespeare–none of which are remotely illustrative of his query. No, Scott, we don’t need “just sayin” for this purpose, not when the ever-reliable “you’re an asshole!, and I mean that in the kindest possible sense” is available.